Junkyard Find: 2000 Chevrolet Metro Hatchback

Murilee Martin
by Murilee Martin

Starting with the Chevrolet Sprint in 1985, General Motors sold rebadged versions of the Suzuki Cultus all the way through the 2001 model year. For the 1989 through 1997 model years, these cars were sold as Geo Metros; after the demise of the Geo brand, they became Chevrolets.

Unlike most miserable econoboxes, the Metro’s decades-long reputation for frugality has kept it on the road for longer than most of its competition, and 21st-century examples are very rare in wrecking yards. Here’s one in a Denver self-service yard.

I looked for a 2001 Metro for quite a while, since I enjoy photographing final-year-of-long-production cars in junkyards, but had to settle for a 2000. This one averaged well over 12,000 miles per year over its lifetime, and still looks pretty clean.

A four-cylinder engine displacing a cavernous 1.3 liters was available as an option for much of the Metro Era, but this car has the penny-pinching 1.0-liter three-cylinder. The four-banger was good for 79 horsepower in 2000, but this car had just 55.

At least it has the five-speed manual transmission, which reduced the misery level somewhat. I once owned a can’t-pass-up-this-deal cheap 1996 Metro with the four-cylinder and automatic, and it was dangerously slow.

The later Metros were built in Ontario by the Suzuki-GM CAMI partnership, so this patriotic gas-sipper is pure North American.

Air conditioning was available in these cars, as can be seen by the block-off plate for the A/C button.

Harlan Ellison liked this car very much, if we are to believe this commercial for the final Geo-badged Metros.

In Japan, these cars weren’t considered incredibly small, but they were still pitched to the frugal.






Murilee Martin
Murilee Martin

Murilee Martin is the pen name of Phil Greden, a writer who has lived in Minnesota, California, Georgia and (now) Colorado. He has toiled at copywriting, technical writing, junkmail writing, fiction writing and now automotive writing. He has owned many terrible vehicles and some good ones. He spends a great deal of time in self-service junkyards. These days, he writes for publications including Autoweek, Autoblog, Hagerty, The Truth About Cars and Capital One.

More by Murilee Martin

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 27 comments
  • Turf3 Turf3 on Jan 08, 2018

    I spent some time in a rental unit some years back. It wasn't really that slow, but you had to drive it like an Italian - foot down to the floor at all times. In fact it was downright perky with only the driver in it, right up to about 65 mph at which point all the "go" was gone. I gave three guys a ride to the airport in it and the added weight made an enormous difference.

    • JohnTaurus JohnTaurus on Jan 08, 2018

      I gave three friends a ride in my 1988 Taurus L, with the 2.5L I-4 and 3 speed auto. One was over 300 lbs and the other two were 250 lbs easy, each. It was not a fast trip. Especially up a steep hill. The 2.5L begged me for mercy, but I held it to the floor, barely topping 35 mph. I had two friends in my old 2.0L Camry, it made a difference as well. They were both over 200 lbs and you could feel the car was noticeably slower, and the handling was even worse than usual. Lots of leaning in corners, with some front-end plowing. Keep in mind, I weighed about 150-160 lbs at both times.

  • JEFFSHADOW JEFFSHADOW on Jan 09, 2018

    Of course Harlan Ellison drove one of theses GEOs for many years-(CA license:HE) I had been reading Ellison's work since 1978 and liked the commercial also. He now has a late 40s Packard which you can find in an Ellison Wonderland "home" video on YouTube!

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next